Councilman Bob Doherty questions motive behind eviction notice

TROY >> The city has refuted claims made by Councilman Bob Doherty of selective enforcement following a notice placed on the building at 51 Third Street as city officials claim it was posted for safety reasons as opposed to political ones.

Doherty, D-District 4, has been advocating for his constituents who live at 51 Third St., which has been known to host live music and art events in the past, after they received a notice from the city asking occupants to vacate the premises or stop their activities.

The notice posted on Jan. 31, according to Doherty, was given in response to a meeting held at the location to plan the march held before the Public Safety Committee meeting in February regarding police actions following the Jan. 25 incident at Kokopelli’s.

“Our citizens have a right to express and petition the government and have the views they have,” Doherty said during a statement he gave before Monday’s special council meeting. “It’s important to respect a citizen’s rights to protest and to have their views. The eviction, by nature, seemed to be a retaliatory act.”

Advertisement

The city, however, claimed the notice had nothing to do with politics and it was more about the safety of the people living there. City Planning Commissioner Bill Dunne said the property was brought to his attention through comments made on a local blog post discussing the events occurring in the building.

Dunne said he also saw a listing of events on the property’s Facebook page, which prompted him to contact Dave Sheeran, the city’s principle code inspector. Sheeran said he then sent inspector Matt McGrath down to check out the building where it was found it did not have a certificate of occupancy, which led to the notice being placed on the building.

“We were letting them know they can’t have any more events until they get a certificate of occupancy,” Sheeran said.

According to Dunne and Sheeran, the notice on the building, which states “Its use of occupancy has been prohibited” and “must be vacated immediately” is not an eviction notice; but more asking the occupants to cease its activities.

However, Doherty didn’t see it that way, as said the notice made it seem as though the building was “unsafe” and “inahbitable.”

“That’s a misrepresentation,” Doherty said, adding he questioned why the city chose that particular moment to post the notice. “And they reached that conclusion without even going into the building. It only came to their attention because of the activity. I don’t think that’s a credible position to have because it doesn’t flow.”

Sheeran said simply because the building was advertising events without having a certificate of occupancy on its building gave the city more than enough reason to post the notice. He cited possible issues such as not having a posted occupancy limit.

“If you have 200 people jammed into an area suitable for 50 people, that’s dangerous,” Sheeran said.

Sheeran said he had spoke with the building’s owner, Igor Vamos, the day the notice was posted and Vamos will be presenting to the city’s Planning Commission for a final site plan review of the site.

Dunne also noted Vamos has retained the Troy Architectural Program to bring the building up to code. Sheeran added once code inspectors are able to look at the layout of the building to look for things such as proper advertisement of emergency exits and other code issues, then a certificate of occupancy can be issued.

The notice was placed on the building before a letter was sent to Vamos notifying him of the code issues, Sheeran said.

“We put the placard on the building because it gets them to call quicker than a letter,” Sheeran said.

Doherty had an issue with this.

“They didn’t communicate with the landlord, they did something else,” Doherty said, questioning why the process had to be expedited that day. “They put up an eviction notice. That seems to be a bizarre way to communicate.”

The city has stressed the notice was not placed on the building for political reasons, but Doherty still doesn’t believe it.

“When ukelele practice was happening there, they showed no concern,” Doherty said. “They weren’t against ukeleles, but they’re against people talking about the police. I think the reaction is retaliatory and a feeble attempt to block people from expressing themselves.”